Back in the day women did everything else, in a close-knit village community of women that bore and raised the children. So women are learners, carers, teachers.
So now what?
Well, we know what. We decided, or God decided, to sublimate our primitive instincts into less violent channels.
For men we have invented exploration, sports, video games, winning market share, tech startups. But clearly young men still need the opportunity to create a bit of mayhem, as in the recent riots and CHAZ/CHOP insurrections. I wonder if we can do a better job of providing scope for mayhem without the unfortunate admixture of lefty lunacy.
But whatabout for women? I think that is the Big Problem today, because the feminists and all the Goodwhites have assumed that What Women Want is to get into the public square and have careers and STEM and become fighter jocks and all.
I think the disproof of that was the incident where a US Navy ship collided with a container ship. And why? Because two women officers "weren't talking to each other."
Yes, how do we sublimate the women's culture of gossip and complaint and social moralizing from the old village community to the modern world? I have to admit that I don't have a clue.
Well, I do have a few ideas. Women should run the education of children, but not as gubmint employees. Rather they should organize their own neighborhood schools for their children and the neighbors' children.
Women should run the social welfare system. But not as gubmint employees. Rather they should act as a voluntary neighborhood or citywide committee to help the helpless. And do the necessary social moralizing to shame the shameless into social behavior.
And women prefer person-to-person jobs and careers. So let's stop worrying about whether women should be in STEM or corporate execs. The truth is that women are instinctively drawn towards activity that involves person-to-person contact and maintains the status quo. So they probably will not like being stuck in front of a computer or directing risky financial and business ventures.
Above all, women should not think that they want to do all the things men do. That is going down a rabbit hole. Men do the things they do because they have had to figure something else to do, something less lethal, now that they don't spend their days sharpening their weapons and keeping an eye on the border.
Women? Well they are not as far down the road as men, because women have been completely engaged in bearing and keeping kids alive until the day before yesterday.
One of the tricky things, in my opinion, is the intersection of this sublimation trend and government. For instance, I see government as a way of reducing male-on-male conflict. But whatabout the moral world? One of the problems I see with modern government is the irruption of the moral. Instead of people conducting their own moral communities separate from government we now have everyone trying to impose their moral principles using the power and the force of government. I don't think this ends well. It certainly didn't in Soviet Russia and Communist China.
And this is a problem where women are concerned, because women control their community of women through their culture of naming and shaming and shunning. Fine, if this social control is the community of women. But if women are using government to impose their moral structure, not so good.
Government and its law and police are designed to deal with serious violations of the peace for which forcible encouragement is needed. Morals and values are for the lesser anti-social behaviors where frowns and less extreme correctional measures are appropriate.
See what I mean? Government is a guy thing, because force. Morals is a girl thing, because "I can't believe you did that" and social moralizing.
Still, it's all a work in progress. Because we are still primitives deep down, and those primitive instincts want to emerge from under the modern repressions. The primitive instincts got their rights, after all!
No comments:
Post a Comment